Court Management: Ensuring Equal Justice and Timely Dispute Resolution - Essay Sample

Introduction

Court management is the coordination of court processes and resources so that court cases progress in a timely fashion from filing to disposition. The main goal of the United States court system is to treat everyone equally and to provide justice conveniently. The federal court helps in solving cases that involve violations of federal law, crimes concerning federal land, bankruptcy cases, and claims based on a state law requiring parties from different states. As a senior policy analyst working in the state's Administrative Office of the courts, I have been instructed to draft a proposal of the effective program that will assist in addressing significant issues in the court system, mostly concerning the juveniles. In my research, I will focus on the victim-offender mediation program (VOM). VOM strategy is the most used restorative program, which helps in solving cases involving less violent incidents committed by the youth (Umbreit, 2002). The program applies a willing aspect whereby both victims and the offenders decide against either participating or not. Victims and offenders are allowed to give out their opinions and understanding concerning the crime, and the mediator, in the end, assists them in forming the agreement for a reunion.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

As a senior policy analyst, my proposal will be based on a few issues. The issues will form a driving force for my research proposal. The state's budget for managing essential and essential services to the citizens is shrinking; thus, an approach that will address the same should be considered. The political environment is unstable because of inadequate knowledge to deal with social problems such as crime committed by youth. To add on, property-related crimes are increasing. Besides, the court systems are failing to offer timely dispute resolutions due to overcrowding. Furthermore, another driving force towards the research is the increase in bargaining, which lengthens the case period, and it is costly. My proposal looks forward to the implementation of the victim-offender mediation program to deal with less severe cases.

My research proposal aims to fulfill the legislature's objectives. The first objective is to reduce the case backlog, whose severity has been observed. The second is to shorten the average time for court hearings to be calendared and for decisions to be rendered. Another research objective is to avoid the expense of expanding the number of courthouses, judges, and associated staff. Besides, minimizing the need for funding of new programs and considering the viability of community burden-sharing through working together with private organizations are among the objectives.

The questions that will guide my research proposal include:

• Would it cost the state less to implement the VOM program for juvenile offenders that it would expand the courts and corrections staff and facility structure?
• Would it take the stateless time to implement the VOM program than it would expand the courts and corrections staff and facility infrastructure?
• To what extent could the VOM program reduce court case backlog and thereby shorten the average time between arrest and case disposition?
• What is the track record of one or more comparable VOM programs?
• What are the social benefits and costs of a VOM program for juvenile offenders both to the offenders themselves and to the broader community?
• Are there particular types of cases that are appropriate, as opposed to others that the legislature might want to exclude?
• What are the significant challenges that will be faced by the administrative Office of the courts in implementing this proposed policy in terms of program development, training and credentialing of mediators, selling it to potentially supportive community resources that could become partners with the state in this effort, case flow and records management together with security issues related to cases being mediated outside of court facilities?

I will be required to use an effective research methodology to answer and come up with solutions to my research questions. The method will involve the integration of variables to act as a guide to the research. I will major in conducting interviews and filing of questionnaires. A correctional facility situated in an area that has already implemented the victim-offender mediation program is highly commendable for conducting this research. This will give insight concerning the annual costs of jailing youths committing a crime in comparison to the yearly expenses putting into practice the program. Another importance of the correctional facility will be to present any problems which they came across while implementing the VOM program. I will also observe the youth who have already gone through the program successfully to note any behavioral change concerning crime. I will also collect data from correctional facility neighbors on how they perceive the implementation of the VOM program policy. The correctional facility will also offer the importance of the program the case backlogs based on experience.

Regarding the questions for my research proposal, implementing a victim-offender mediation program in the United States court system is less costly when compared to expanding courts and corrections staff and facility infrastructure. For example, Georgia State saves approximately one million dollars yearly after directing juveniles to the VOM programs instead of detaining them in the cells (Messmer & Otto, 2013). Adding the number of workers would also lead to an additional cost of salary payments. Besides, expanding the court and the essential infrastructure is very costly because of incurring costs of building materials and labor. Thus, implementing a VOM policy will assist in saving a lot of tax payer's money. The VOM program also helps in saving time, which could have otherwise being consumed by the court in getting evidence and prosecuting the offender. The implementation procedure is simple as it only needs the approval of the court. The victim and the offender are likely to spend less than twenty-four hours into reaching an agreement, which is contrary to the court system, which wastes a lot of time during trials and hearings.

A court case backlog is a pending case that is pending before the court for a more extended period than the one prescribed (Gramckow, 2005). The delay in the court system usually emerges as a result of procrastinating many cases after the initial hearing. In a situation where the number of postponed cases rises, the judge may make appointments even six months after the initial interview, which is time-consuming. The VOM policy is thus useful in reducing the case backlog in the court system because the offenders do not need to go through the judicial system to confess.

In a study conducted, among the 1298 juveniles interviewed, 619 had undergone through VOM program. Those who did not go through the VOM program repeated the crime that they had previously committed (Volpe & Strobl, 2005). This is because the VOM involves a series of confessions. After confessing, an individual feels ruthful about their actions. Those who undergo the court trial procedure do not have any ruthful feelings; thus they dare to commit more crimes.

The VOM policy program is socially essential to both the offender and the community at large (Messmer & Otto, 2013). The offender ends up having a feeling of closure after he or she has confessed and accepted his mistakes. This minimizes the fear of socializing with others in the community. The VOM also helps in solving the rising number of family-related cases, which may be very sensitive to handle. This helps in reducing congestion in the courts as well as addressing issues amicably at the family level and outside the court settings, which results in harmony between the victim and the offender. In the end, peace prevails in the community. Besides, the resources which could have been used to solve family cases are used to address other issues such as criminal cases that require much attention.

The victim-offender approach is used to solve cases involving less violent crimes. Criminal cases should not undergo the VOM program as they require severe trials and hearings. Youth are the most targeted group for this program (Hughes, 2000). The approach should not be used in cases that involve underage offenders. This is because this group of individuals is likely to confess that they have committed a crime even when they have not just to get themselves out of the situation.

Implementation of the VOM policy program is faced with a lot of challenges (Volpe & Strobl, 2005). Developing the plan and convincing the community to accept it will require finances, which is a challenge to the Administrative Office of the Courts. In terms of training, a rule has not yet been formulated that suggests mediators cannot use skills acquired in other areas. However, mediators are supposed to receive standardized formal training to conduct their duties well in the field. The community experiences some tension because they have not been well enlightened on how the program works. The community may also fail to accept back the offenders because they want them to face the judicial system instead of undergoing through VOM program. Safety for the victims and the offender is not guaranteed after confession in cases where the crime was violent because the victim may decide to retaliate.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the victim-offender mediation program policy is the most effective in solving out juvenile cases. In my research, I will be guided by the objectives and research questions, as discussed above. The program has high client satisfaction rates, victim participation rates, and helps in minimizing criminal behaviors among the offenders. The VOM program is also less costly and time-saving in implementing. However, the program does not guarantee safety for both the victim and the offender after mediation. The community is also reluctant to accept the program entirely because of a lack of understanding of how the program works.

References

Gramckow, H. (2005). Can US-type court management approaches work in civil law systems? Experiences from the Balkans and beyond. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 11(1), 97-120.

Hughes, S. P. (2000). Victim-Offender Mediation in the Juvenile Justice System. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Restitution Education, Specialized Training & Technical Assistance Program.

Messmer, H., & Otto, H. U. (Eds.). (2013). Restorative Justice on Trial: Pitfalls and Potentials of Victim-Offender Mediation-International Research Perspectives-(Vol.64). Springer Science & Business Media.

Umbreit, M. S. (2002). The handbook of victim-offender mediation: An essential guide to practice and research. John Willey & Sons.

Volpe, M. R., & Strobl, S. (2005). Restorative justice responses to post-September 11 hate crimes: Potential and challenges. Conflict resolution Quarterly, 22(4), 527-535.